IBJOpinion

EDITORIAL: University research funding is on right path

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint
IBJ Editorial

Indiana’s public universities aren’t garnering enough research funding, and the research they’re conducting isn’t churning out high-paying jobs in quantities everyone would like, but Hoosiers shouldn’t be wringing their hands in despair.

There’s plenty to celebrate in spite of a recent ranking by the National Science Foundation that showed Indiana is in the middle of the pack compared with other states in research spending per capita at public universities.

As IBJ reported last week, the state was 22nd in public university research spending per person in 2008, the most recent year for which comparisons are available. That’s nothing to brag about, but the total of $852 million spent on research in 2008 is almost $400 million more than in 2000.

Funding grew 82 percent in that time, outpacing the national average by about 10 percent. Research spending at Indiana and Purdue universities, where almost all the research takes place, grew to $895 million in 2009.

With all that growth, moving up just four spots in the rankings over a decade ago doesn’t seem like much of an improvement. But Indiana was late to the party in making research a priority. Purdue and Indiana had a lot of catching up to do to come up with the kind of research that can translate into high-paying, private-sector jobs.

Indeed, the state’s wage data isn’t pretty. In 1998, Hoosiers made 92 percent of what the average American earns. In 2008, the number had slipped to 86 percent.

It’s discouraging that pay is headed in the wrong direction, but that shouldn’t be a surprise. Counting on research to create jobs and improve wages is the right strategy, but it’s not a quick fix. It takes years for the payoff, unlike snagging a factory that almost instantly can employ thousands earning a good living wage.

University-based research isn’t the only path to new jobs, but it’s an important tool in the state’s arsenal. Maintaining the state’s steady improvement over the last decade is key.

Things couldn’t be much better on the private-sector front. Indiana ranks No. 4 nationally on research spending per capita provided by industry. Public-sector funding is another matter. Indiana ranked 26th per capita in state support and No. 31 in federal support.

Being fiscally responsible in harsh economic times limits what the state can do, but there should be no wavering in our commitment. To see what our investment in research can return, look no further than Endocyte Inc., the cancer-fighting firm borne of Purdue research that is about to go public with an $86 million stock offering.

Indiana’s improvement in research funding over a decade is worth celebrating. Let’s keep things headed in the right direction.•
__________

To comment on this editorial, write to ibjedit@ibj.com.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. First, the Athenaeum is going to have to get past the hurdle with the Lockerbie residents and the agreement that the parcel would be residential. Second, and in my opinion, this prime piece of property should include parking, PLUS, a black box theater(s), some market rate and affordable artist housing and a plan to renovate and reconfigure the second story theater. I would negotiate to add the DeHaan property surface parking lot into the development mix, place a one story surface parking garage on the DeHaan lot on the street level (for the Dehaan tenants use during the daytime) and add a second story to the garage that would become an addition to the current second story theater and then change the direction of the theater by moving the stage across the alley and on top of the DeHaan lot parking. You can add all the stage elements that are currently missing from the Athenaeum stage to make it more attractive for use by Ballet, Opera and traveling productions. Plus, the theater changes would probably help solve some of the soundproofing issues. Alas,it does not seem to be a part of the strategic plan to conduct a study to determine best use of the property. Seems like the current plan is a quick and easy move that ignores the property best use/potential and any strategic property planning for the effect on future generations.

  2. I recall that MSA's pilings are still in the ground and hard to remove. It’s not likely any proposal will include significant underground construction/parking because of this. Start adding 2 floors of retail, 8 floors of parking and 5-10 floors of possible hotel, and/or 10-20 floors of residential, and you are at 30 floors already with possible expansion of all the uses. But then again I could be wrong.

  3. Accoriding to their website there is no deadline to the Do Not Call list. What is this article referring to??

  4. On what planet are they entitled to this largesse from the stockholders? These people make multi-million dollar salaries: Pay for your own personal travel.

  5. It matters because they're already paid enormously fat salaries: Pay for your own personal travel. Being "taxed on it" isn't a valid excuse--so what? They're still being gifted a raft of luxury perks from somebody else's money on top of an enormous, lavish salary.

ADVERTISEMENT